Home About ATSDR Press Room A-Z Index Glossary Employment Training Contact Us CDC  
ATSDR/DHHS Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Department of Health and Human Services ATSDR en Español

Search:

Toxic Substances and Health
 
Report Contents
 
Charge to the Panel
Panel Members
 
Fate & Biomonitoring
 
Sampling Methodologies
Health Endpoints
Susceptible Populations
Exposure Evaluation
Biomonitoring
 
Correlation of Data
 
Risk Management
 
Relocation Criteria
 
Reference Doses
 
Decontamination
 
Recommendations
 
Clinical Evaluation
 
Appropriate Triggers
Health Status
Environmental Medicine
 
Evaluation Protocol
 
Standardizing Lab Data
Treatment
Neurobehavioral Effects
Acute Poisoning
Suggested Evaluation
 
Overarching Issues
 
Recommendations
Field Survey
7-day Study
Dermal Absorption
Subchronic Toxicity
Pilot Study
Cohort Study
 
Selected References
 
Risk Communication
 
Workgroup
Recommendations
Operating Procedures
Management & Planning
Limitations of Strategies
Planning Steps
Identifying Populations
Preventing Exposures
Research Needs
Conclusions
 
Risk Documents
 
Cancer Policy
Risk Assessment
Communication Primer
Evaluation Primer
Psychologial Responses
 
ATSDR Resources
 
Case Studies (CSEM)
Exposure Pathways
GATHER (GIS)
HazDat Database
Health Assessments
Health Statements
Interaction Profiles
Interactive Learning
Managing Incidents
Medical Guidelines
Minimal Risk Levels
Priority List
ToxFAQs™
ToxFAQs™ CABS
Toxicological Profiles
Toxicology Curriculum
 
External Resources
 
CDC
eLCOSH
EPA
Healthfinder®
Medline Plus
NCEH
NIEHS
NIOSH
OSHA
 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Methyl Parathion Expert Panel Report
Health Education and Risk Communication Strategies


Given the apparently widespread indoor use of methyl parathion and the limited understanding of associated public health implications, is the current strategy of health professional education, community health education, and the national health alert the most appropriate and effective methodology?


Public Health Practice Workgroup - Charge to the Workgroup

Good communication is as important as good science for protecting public health. ATSDR and EPA should be commended for including an emphasis on communication in this expert panel workshop. The federal, state, and local agencies, despite tremendous time and resource constraints, have also stressed communicating with affected populations.

Clearly, there is a commitment to public health education and a recognition that communication is essential to coping with the methyl parathion situation. A suggestion or recommendation in this document does not imply that agencies have failed to take such action. In fact, given agency expertise and commitment, we would be surprised if many of our suggestions have not been acted upon in some way. Finally, our mission is not to critique current agency programs, nor do we have the information to do so. Thus, any examples of communication problems, unless otherwise stated, are derived from research or experience with issues other than MP.

Although agencies need guidance on step-by-step processes, this document does not attempt to serve as a manual. We cannot emphasize strongly enough that we see the following guidance as a beginning of agency consideration of communication issues, not a communication plan.

The efforts of the public health practice work group would not have been possible without the input of affected people from three states, and the personnel from ATSDR, EPA, and state agencies who provided information, reality checks, and invaluable ideas.

Finally, in this section of the expert panel report we have not examined the larger policy decisions about the most appropriate public interventions. We have not looked at whether agencies should be conducting mitigation or pursuing other strategies, nor have we examined where responsibility should lie. We assume such strategies have already been examined not only from technical perspectives but also from social ones.

Top of Page